Forum: Author Hangout

Regarding age limitations in stories

ahumbleman2016-11-25 8:11:01pm

I've been considering submitting a story here, but going over the Author Agreement I was somewhat confused by the age restriction clause, since I distinctly recall reading many stories involving persons under the specified age. Furthermore, since the boy/girl lolita/pedophilia tags are still a function of the site, I'm not clear on exactly how strongly that rule is enforced.

Should a story never contain any allusion to underage sex? Is it merely the explicit writing of a sex scene that's forbidden- for example, it can be implied that a character has been sexually active when they were young, but writing out the details would be a violation? Can I write, "Sally started giving blowjobs at 12" as backstory, as long as any explicit action in the story takes place when she's 14? What about a "fade to black" scenario? Is it just up to a moderator's discretion?

The only stories which fit under the "Pedo" qualification were submitted some time ago--before the restrictions were put into place. The restrictions were necessitated by a change in Canadian law, making it a criminal offense to include descriptions of sex by anyone younger than 16 a crime, regarless of literary content. Rather than risk losing his site and potential jail time, Lazeez put in the current restrictions (though he extended it (slightly) to age 14 instead of 16)).

Allusions are fine, explicit descriptions are what are forbidden. A character can state "I was raped as a child", but they can't describe the details, which makes writing such stories difficult.

The restrictions are similar to that passed by Australia at the same time (under which the author can be prosecuted for having written the story, as can anyone with a copy on their computer). Most Indie publishing sites (Amazon, lulu, createspace and smashwords) also have similar restrictions, though you wouldn't know it by looking at their offerings. However, the authors typically tend to churn out low-quality stories, and if some get pulled, they simply churn out more since Amazon, for one, rarely inspects submissions.

If you want to write the older style, explicit pedo story, there's still ASSTR, which as an fully American site, still offers them.

By the way, as far as I can tell, each of your alternative scenarios should work. If in doubt, ask Lezeez via the "Contact Administration" button on the main page.

Rather than risk losing his site and potential jail time, Lazeez put in the current restrictions (though he extended it (slightly) to age 14 instead of 16)).

That doesn't sound right to me, CW. If Canadian law says nothing under 16 and Lazeez has 14, then we could describe a 15 year old having sex, and the site would be in violation of Canadian law. If Lazeez were to extend the age limit, he would have to go the other direction to say, 18.

I believe the ones which do not limit the ages are what is referred to as "Grandfathered". In other words written and posted before the new laws were voted and signed. Everything after that vote and signing by the applicable government do have to follow the age restrictions.

When you are unsure of what might be acceptable. I would suggest checking with other writers/editor and/or the site management. It probably doesn't hurt to check and at least you will be better respected for it.

That doesn't sound right to me, CW. If Canadian law says nothing under 16 and Lazeez has 14, then we could describe a 15 year old having sex, and the site would be in violation of Canadian law.

He's gambling on the spirit of the law, that the government prosecutors will be unlikely to prosecute a prominent site when charging someone with 'child porn' would win more votes. Given that it's difficult to write a high school story without including a few sexual references, it makes sense (for us at least). But if you read the law (referenced in posts from when the site first switched over), you'll see it states 16, rather than 14.

Thus a bland statement of: Jan was raped when ten years old is permitted, but a description of the rape isn't.

The ideal description is to have Jan reveal what happened to her and then describe her reaction (tears, shaking, drinking, etc. That's called 'showing vs. telling' and is generally more powerful. That way you focus on Jan's personal issues, rather than on the event itself.

I actually just asked Lazeez something along these lines for my own story. Quick background - one of the secondary characters is a vampire that was turned at age 10, and now is 300 years old. (Yes, it's Babette, if you know Skyrim.)

Basically (as per Lazeez) what I have to do is avoid physical descriptions of her as a 10 year old, have her act as adult as any psychopathic vampiric assassin would, and the story will be fine. Which means if she does have sex of any kind, it'll be off screen. I can reference it, but I won't describe it.

Basically (as per Lazeez) what I have to do is avoid physical descriptions of her as a 10 year old, have her act as adult as any psychopathic vampiric assassin would, and the story will be fine. Which means if she does have sex of any kind, it'll be off screen. I can reference it, but I won't describe it.

That makes sense, but ... you've got to consider, if she's permanently 10 years old, her body will never produce enough hormones for her ever to reach sexual maturity. Thus the whole idea of her having (or wanting) sex of any kind is a bit of a stretch.

her body will never produce enough hormones for her ever to reach sexual maturity. Thus the whole idea of her having (or wanting) sex of any kind is a bit of a stretch.

Keep in mind the average age when puberty starts in girls is about 10-11. So her body would have started producing hormones, just never finished. Remember how in 'Interview with the Vampire' that Claudia matured mentally but not physically. So Claudia knew what she was missing, and wanted more, but as you said, can't reach maturity physically to actually have intercourse.

Kids start masturbating when they're young, frequently as young as 6. They just don't know why they're doing it, just that it feels good. It happens, we all know it, it's just that we pretend as parents we never explored when we were kids. Think about playing doctor, after all.

And you don't have to have hormones coursing through your body to orgasm, just to be able to have consequences of that orgasm that matter, meaning kids.

Thus the whole reason d'etre for asstr.org vanished within the stretch of one idea merely being expressed.

Not at all. If the character was pressured into sexual relationships, and simply conceded as a concession, I could see it. Likewise, if she wasn't interested in sex, there would be absolutely no reason why she should care whether anyone was interested in sex (somehow, I can't picture prudish vampires).

P.S. ASSTR wasn't started as a 'Pedo site'. It was started as a place to write stories that Included sex scenes, since at the time of its inceptions, there weren't many alternatives. However, now that everyone is accepting sex scenes, and pedo authors have no other options, it's become the de facto default site for Pedo, and has thereby squeezed (almost) every other type of story out.

So Claudia knew what she was missing, and wanted more, but as you said, can't reach maturity physically to actually have intercourse.

Except, we all know from watching the news on a regular basis, that sex with children IS physically possible. The only reason why it isn't more common, is because kids that age have no real desire to engage in it. If pressed (say by a brother, father or cousin) they may consent, but they'll rarely initiate it, and most times they'll avoid it, even when being forced to consent.

And yes, I remember Claudia from the 'Interview with the Vampire' book, but when I first read it, I thought 'this really doesn't make much sense'. Basically, it fails my 'common sense' test. If kids have little interest in sex, then why would a 400 year old kid have any more interest in it?

I'm not sure I understand that. Is Lazeez saying that no descriptions of 10 year olds are allowed, or no sexual descriptions (eg genitalia) of 10 year olds?

In his case (she's really 300 years old trapped in a ten-year-old-looking body), I advised that he can have her have sex, but shouldn't describe the sex as a pedo would like it to be, like tiny hairless parts other flat parts stuff like that. You know where the arousing part is her looking like a 10-year-old.

If I ever complete the story and decide it's worth a wider audience, I'd better run the relevant part past you before I start submitting. My description of the the girl, intended to come across as asexual, might arguably be appealing to some unspeakable people.

If I ever complete the story and decide it's worth a wider audience, I'd better run the relevant part past you before I start submitting. My description of the the girl, intended to come across as asexual, might arguably be appealing to some unspeakable people.

There's a simple suggestion, separate the description (of her looks) from the description of the sex scene. Simply describe, early on, what she looks like, ignoring what her sex organs appear. Then, during the sex scene, simply avoid any descriptions of her sex organs aside from "she grew damp" or "she quivered". That way, you can describe the character and also avoid any complications.

If kids have little interest in sex, then why would a 400 year old kid have any more interest in it?

Because she's got the body of a kid - but keep in mind you're confusing mental maturity with physical maturity. And since my story is a fan fiction based upon TESV:Skyrim, the character IN THE ORIGINAL GAME talks being an adult in a childs body, using her size and innocent appearance to lure people so she can KILL them.

And I meant to say, before, mature physically to actually get pregnant, not intercourse. (The joys of typing on your phone while at work.)

In any event, I'm not planning on anyone having a massive sexual orgy with Babette. What I was actually doing was inventing a bit of conversation between two women, where one was asking the other about getting cured from vampirism.

I think it'd be nice at times to have a figure like you or Astrid. But I can still take care of my … personal needs. Just because my body hasn't changed doesn't mean I don't know how things work. It's not like I can get pregnant, so … it's such fun, especially those contracts for those who like to prey on little girls, to be the little girl who preys upon them

Let's not forget that a large bit of sexual desire and satisfaction is mental. Granted a lot of that comes from physical stimulation.

I'm not into Vampire lore. From what little I know about the subject, Vampires do not kill their victims in the process of turning them into a vampire. Why would a 10-year old child's body stop developing physically?

I'm not into Vampire lore. From what little I know about the subject, Vampires do not kill their victims in the process of turning them into a vampire. Why would a 10-year old child's body stop developing physically?

There really is not one fixed set of "rules." That's why you can have sparkly vampires, daywalkers, born vampires, made vampires, vampires that reflect, and vampires that have no reflection. Generally, if you are writing within a certain story universe, then there are acceptable assumptions if you want to keep your audience. In Anne Rice's story world, vampires stop aging at the time they are turned. In the Underworld movie universe, vampires are born and grow up, iirc. I have read stories where vamps could be either born or made, with the made ones being little more than mindless killers.

I'm not into Vampire lore. From what little I know about the subject, Vampires do not kill their victims in the process of turning them into a vampire. Why would a 10-year old child's body stop developing physically?

That depends on which set of vampire myths you are referring to. Some do have death as an integral part of becoming a vampire, some don't.

In any case, vampires are near immortal. Even if still alive, they age very slowly. A girl turned on her 10th birthday could take centuries to reach the developmental state of a human 11 year old.

In any case, vampires are near immortal. Even if still alive, they age very slowly. A girl turned on her 10th birthday could take centuries to reach the developmental state of a human 11 year old.

My only problem with the 10-year-old 400 year old vampire having sex is that it doesn't pass my common sense test. However, your version does makes sense. If they simply age slower, then it makes sense they'd develop sexuality at a different rate than humans, and the development would make sense. Yet when I read Ann Rice, I was left wondering 'what the hell use to vampires have for human hormones?'

The important thing is for stories to have an internal consistency. Many vampire stories revolve around the vampire as a sexual analogy, the ultimate sexual bad boy, who'll turn you into a creature of the night. As long as it makes sense in your particular universe, you should be okay with whichever way you go.

Wheezer gave the correct response, because you can have everything from Dark Shadows to Twilight, with Blade and Selene thrown in, and call them vampires. If you're into science fantasy (with lots of guns), I'd recommend the Monster Hunter series by Larry Correia.

The basic rule is simple - vampires drink blood. Now, whether they only need blood (human or animal) to survive or also have to eat, whether it's a curse, a disease, a virus, whether they can enter light (and sparkle!), or are instantly burned to ash - would a cross affect a jewish vampire - those are up for grabs.

The basic rule is simple - vampires drink blood. Now, whether they only need blood (human or animal) to survive or also have to eat, whether it's a curse, a disease, a virus, whether they can enter light (and sparkle!), or are instantly burned to ash - would a cross affect a jewish vampire - those are up for grabs.

In one series of Dead Tree vampire romances I read it's medical nanites developed in Atlantis (just before the fall) gone wrong.

The nanites were supposed to heal the body, deactivate and flush out of the patients system. The nanites are powered by consuming the patient's blood.

What went wrong is that the human body is constantly taking minor damage from a variety of sources so the nanites never flush out and a person does not produce enough blood to keep the nanites going indefinitely.

Prior to the fall, the patients were given blood transfusions, after, the nanites forced them to evolve to obtain blood without transfusions.

They aren't killed by sunlight, but sunlight damages the human body in a number of ways, causing the nanites to be more active and burn through their blood faster, so if they go out in daylight, they have to feed more/more often.

Actually from most of those stories the two most popular emotion based flavors are lust and fear.

Another interesting aspect from the Atlantian nanite vampires, they can eat normal food, they are unaffected by drugs or alcohol ingested normally, but can get drunk/high by drinking blood from drunks/addicts.

I kind of got around it in my tale 'Sins of the father's' by setting it in the 1950's when the onset of puberty was much later than it is now. However I was prepared to pull it if the admins objected, last thing I want is to bring trouble to the site.

That makes sense, but ... you've got to consider, if she's permanently 10 years old, her body will never produce enough hormones for her ever to reach sexual maturity. Thus the whole idea of her having (or wanting) sex of any kind is a bit of a stretch.

...EXCEPT, depending on the lore, the vampire lives on the blood of others because they cannot produce it themselves. So HER ability to produce hormones doesn't matter, it's the hormones of her victims that matter. Being female, and also presuming one of her main lures is sexual in nature(as often is the case for vampires). That would mean her victims are usually male. Which would give her a healthy amount of testosterone as well. With medical knowledge at this time indicating "elevated testosterone" should lead to increased sexual aggression....

But even without heading down that particular garden path, a 200+ year old vampire in a child's body would be more than aware that sex is going on around them, even if they have no physical imperative to participate. At some point, they're probably going to "try sex out" just to see what the big deal is all about.

This also ignores all the vampire lore about their being sexual predators, and the possibility that the vampire who "turned" her may have raped her at some point(or someone else did at some point). With the additional add-in that the vampire/rapist knew how to pleasure her, and did so.

I'm given to understand that while pre-pubescent are unlikely to initiate sexual activities on their own. Once they realize such activities "feel REALLY good" and so long as nobody gives them reason not to do otherwise, they're going to be fairly eager to "Feel good" again. See also: masturbation, I definitely remember having already been doing that on my own by the age of 8, and probably was doing so earlier than that. As I recall, what little medical research done into this area suggests most people have "discovered" it by their 2nd or 3rd birthday, although parents (obviously) usually discourage the behavior with varying degrees of success(some will just learn how to better hide it), and then it's just a matter of when the child "re-discovers" it. Which admittedly for some may be during or after puberty.

The specifics of what little I recall as the subject matter being considered may have changed over time, but the underlying (sexual) act of genital play was already in action by then.

Except, we all know from watching the news on a regular basis, that sex with children IS physically possible. The only reason why it isn't more common, is because kids that age have no real desire to engage in it.

By "child" in this case, I'm assuming you mean someone who has not yet entered puberty. And in that context I'm generally agreed.

If pressed (say by a brother, father or cousin) they may consent, but they'll rarely initiate it, and most times they'll avoid it, even when being forced to consent.

Back to general agreement, assuming 2 things:

1) The child in question is sexually inexperienced.

2) The child in question, if sexually experienced, hasn't had a "pleasurable experience" while engaged in the act. (and considering many, if not most people, are "bad at sex" that isn't hard to imagine)

For most children, their main interest in things will be "is it fun?" and "does it make me feel good?" (And making them feel good is likely to make it "fun" for them. As that is an all too common crtieria given by children for why anything might be "fun")

For a child that simply walks in on someone having sex, they're likely to simply declare the typical "Sex is gross" response and go elsewhere, as you mention.

But in the event someone is around without scruples, and they work the child past the "it's gross" stage, the situation is likely to change. I'm not saying that is a good thing, it just happens to be a thing)(with a long list of reasons why NOT to do so). So it still runs back to "Someone deliberately introduced a child to sex" whether that someone is a 30-something pedophile, or a 13 year old introducing an 11 year old who then initiates a 9 year old in turn.

It just happens that the odds are very good that the 13 YO will be terrible at sex(like most young people), so the 11YO won't enjoy the experience, and that'll be the end of it. Or if the 13 YO is somehow good at it, the 11YO won't be as skilled, so the 9YO won't enjoy it, and it ends there.

What went wrong is that the human body is constantly taking minor damage from a variety of sources so the nanites never flush out and a person does not produce enough blood to keep the nanites going indefinitely.

Which gets into all kinds of other weird science that we're still trying to figure out, and probably won't have entirely worked out for decades to come.

We know a LOT of the aging process comes as a result of accumulated cellular damage. There are large amounts of data now being collected about various means of slowing or even partially reversing some of this damage.

If all goes well, in about 20 years, when I'm hitting my 60's. We'll have a host of medicines to let me enjoy my 60's while enjoying the metabolism of a 20-something while likely feeling like I'm back in my 30's or early 40's. I still may not make it to 100 even with those goodies, or much past it(although I had (great)grandparents who did, so my odds are decent), but getting there may not be so bad for me as it was for my Grandparents(and others on this board). But that's a digression.

Now that's aging due to cellular damage. What about the aging due to physical maturation? How are the two aging processes related? Are they related? In what way?

Something triggered the release of those hormones to initiate the process of entering puberty, so what did it? Will slowing down the aging process due to cellular damage likewise slow down the maturation process?

If you want that check out this on Wiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie_restriction
It's been known for about a hundred years to substantially increase the lifespan of rats.
***
I read about a recent study in The Economist. One group on a low calorie diet had a gene switched off and fared no better than the control.
That gene is triggered by famine, then causing redoubled efforts to cannibalise aging mitochondria (for their nutrients). Mitochondria are known to produce far more free radicals as they age.
***
But, you might be less keen when you learn what is needed for this to work :-)

Not_a_ID2016-11-28 8:11:23am

Oh, I know all about the calorie restriction diet, I'm on the opposite end of that spectrum. :)

I'll just cross my fingers in regards to the research going on around NAD and its associated mechanisms and their creating a pill for me instead. =P

There actually are a few common dietary supplements out there that evidently contain the chemical triggers to put your body into "caloric restriction" mode, evidently without needing to do the caloric restriction. They're just verifying that it works in practice, and the specifics of what exactly is going on there(with humans) now.

So HER ability to produce hormones doesn't matter, it's the hormones of her victims that matter.

That's part of what's required when authors build their universes. In the original books, there was no such justification, the underaged character just had sex whenever she wanted, and I (despite enjoying the books) had trouble accepting that part of her universe). However, if that caveat had been included, I could have accepted it as par for the course.

The key, as usual, is to anticipate what minor nits are going to cause particular readers issues, and then take those concerns in hand and nip them in the bud, so they never come up. That means, acknowledge the issue[s] early on, establish it as part of your 'universe', provide a reasonable explanation, and then keep to your rules (i.e. don't make stuff up on the fly just because you wrote your way into a corner).

The restrictions are similar to that passed by Australia at the same time (under which the author can be prosecuted for having written the story, as can anyone with a copy on their computer).

My member of Parliament in Australia sent me details of the Federal law there (email me if you want a copy).
The law is as stupid as it could possibly be.
The age limit is 18, it covers "material that describes" as broadly as possible, includes everything that could be done with those materials, and then applies a totally subjective test for whether or not something was a crime, i.e. "(describes) in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, offensive."

May not be able to - it had to have been written by a Christian Right Fundamentalist and people are scared of being branded as anti-Christian if they doing anything against such abusers who manage to get elected to high office, despite being an orifice.

May not be able to - it had to have been written by a Christian Right Fundamentalist and people are scared of being branded as anti-Christian if they doing anything against such abusers who manage to get elected to high office, despite being an orifice.

Sorry, you misunderstood. My message was about someone requesting the prosecutor convict an author because they were personally offended.